Does anyone find it difficult to interface with Max? Maybe I'm just

approaching it wrong or something, maybe just a lack of decent ideas.

I've been working with Max for a few years and it's not that I don't

know how to use it but it's like whenever I sit down to create

something, it ends up not working the way I imagined it or I just lose

the inspiration I had at the start. It feels hard to interface with. I

just end up creating stuff that isn't very useful and repetitive and

trite. I have some good ideas and I know how I can create them but

being an artist ius difficult at tims so I thought I'd see how other

people do it. By the way, this is not a question where I need a "you

just need to read the manual more" type of answer, it's more of an

I don't know, these could just be lame feelings and maybe I'm not

technical enough but I'd love to hear how other people create usable

Does anyone find it difficult to interface with Max? Maybe I'm just
approaching it wrong or something, maybe just a lack of decent ideas.
I've been working with Max for a few years and it's not that I don't
know how to use it but it's like whenever I sit down to create
something, it ends up not working the way I imagined it or I just lose
the inspiration I had at the start. It feels hard to interface with. I
just end up creating stuff that isn't very useful and repetitive and
trite. I have some good ideas and I know how I can create them but
being an artist ius difficult at tims so I thought I'd see how other
people do it. By the way, this is not a question where I need a "you
just need to read the manual more" type of answer, it's more of an
inspirational question.

I don't know, these could just be lame feelings and maybe I'm not
technical enough but I'd love to hear how other people create usable
tools in Max and how they approach it.


working-with-max-is-not-easy

barry threw :: sound | (if you would see the stars clearly,

 | look hard at the surrounding darkness)

bthrew(at)gmail(dot)com |      -Ooka Makoto

-- 
barry threw :: sound      |   (if you would see the stars clearly,
http://www.barrythrew.com |   look hard at the surrounding darkness)
bthrew(at)gmail(dot)com   |                 	  -Ooka Makoto
857-544-3967              |


Experimental electronic. I need to be able to get to the point of

creating the tool and THEN using it which is the fun part. I need the

Experimental electronic. I need to be able to get to the point of
creating the tool and THEN using it which is the fun part. I need the
fun part.


well, max takes times to really be able to just start from scratch and

I got used to max by creating patch thru systems, where I could route, say a

Then as I got more used to the methods, I started trying to create larger

more complex patches that I could actually perform with.

Either way, the key is having a goal, and putting the bigger picture

together with smaller parts, and smaller meaning compartmentalizing things.

I hear you, it can be pointless, when you sit down with not much of a goal

in mind, or no way of knowing how to get there.

Best advice is, decide what you want to build, figure out how you can break

it down (if you want a bunch of specialized sample-players, you can just

build one, and modify instances of it), then try putting something small

together. If you cant get it to work, try and locate the problem area. If

its a missing object, and you dont know what would work, email the list.

so, my workflow often comes out like this...Idea--miniaturized

I dont know if that helps or even makes sense.

well, max takes times to really be able to just start from scratch and
create something mindblowing.

I got used to max by creating patch thru systems, where I could route, say a
MIDI signal to do something odd...

Then as I got more used to the methods, I started trying to create larger
more complex patches that I could actually perform with.

Either way, the key is having a goal, and putting the bigger picture
together with smaller parts, and smaller meaning compartmentalizing things.

I hear you, it can be pointless, when you sit down with not much of a goal
in mind, or no way of knowing how to get there.

Best advice is, decide what you want to build, figure out how you can break
it down (if you want a bunch of specialized sample-players, you can just
build one, and modify instances of it), then try putting something small
together.  If you cant get it to work, try and locate the problem area.  If
its a missing object, and you dont know what would work, email the list.

so, my workflow often comes out like this...Idea--miniaturized
version--troubleshooting--go bigger

> Experimental electronic. I need to be able to get to the point of

> creating the tool and THEN using it which is the fun part. I need the

Since I'm horrible at "getting to the fun", I too, would love to hear 

others tips on the subject of productivity. Heres some tips that I'm 

Most importantly: When you think of something, don't rush into it. 

Ask yourself "What is my risk/reward ratio?" Are you going to spend 

30 days on a program you'll use twice or possibly hate when you 

finish? Max is very easy to get carried away with.

     At times, I've personally felt it's choked off my actual creative 

output. In fact I would be interested to hear other's strategies and 

thoughts as to "creative output" vs "max for max sake."

    That being said, Its good to write scripts for things you find 

yourself doing many times. I recently wrote myself a script which 

takes all my parameters and applies a routing matrix to them. This 

inherently provides midi CC control and preset infrastructure. 

Basically, you write your algorithm, gui, apply this system, and your 

**in the extras menu, keep a patcher of common equations and patching 

**if your bug has to do with unexpected behavior of an object, amend 

**indispensable abstraction 1: the old ascii midi keyboard trick for 

**indispensable abstraction 2: takes note/velocity info, spits out 

I'm no guru. this is just what I've found

> Experimental electronic. I need to be able to get to the point of
> creating the tool and THEN using it which is the fun part. I need the
> fun part.

Since I'm horrible at "getting to the fun", I too, would love to hear  
others tips on the subject of productivity. Heres some tips that I'm  
far from mastering.

Most importantly:  When you think of something, don't rush into it.   
Ask yourself "What is my risk/reward ratio?"  Are you going to spend  
30 days on a program you'll use twice or possibly hate when you  
finish?  Max is very easy to get carried away with.
	 At times, I've personally felt it's choked off my actual creative  
output.  In fact I would be interested to hear other's strategies and  
thoughts as to "creative output" vs "max for max sake."

	That being said, Its good to write scripts for things you find  
yourself doing many times.  I recently wrote myself a script which  
takes all my parameters and applies a routing matrix to them.  This  
inherently provides midi CC control and preset infrastructure.   
Basically, you write your algorithm, gui, apply this system, and your  
done.

Other time savers:
**in the extras menu, keep a patcher of common equations and patching  
figures.(small groups of objects).
**if your bug has to do with unexpected behavior of an object, amend  
the help file.
**indispensable abstraction 1: the old ascii midi keyboard trick for  
entering midi info quickly.
**indispensable abstraction 2: takes note/velocity info, spits out  
sine waves.

I'm no guru.  this is just what I've found
-matt


Well, there might be your first problem. Not in sense that the kind of 

music you want to make is bad, but in the sense that you really have to 

define your goals before you start. "Experimental electronic" covers a 

lot of ground. Do you want to sound like Aphex Twin, David Tutor, Les 

Stuck, Matmos, Gregory Taylor, Barry Threw, Christopher Willits, or 

Radiohead? Of course you want to sound like yourself, but you have to 

have a voice in mind. Do you want to drop phat beats, or create subtle 

Once you answer that question, then perhaps a good exercise would be to 

create one piece with a Max patch. Not a magnum opus, but just 

something you kind of like, and more importantly, that feels like its a 

sound you can resonate with. After that, you think about what aspects 

of that piece you liked, and try and generalize those features that

Start small and simple, and add features as you go. Don't start out 

trying to make a 10.16 surround patch that uses a comprehensive array of 

effects and synthesis techniques and also makes julienne fries. If you 

start out small, it will be conceptually easier to work your way through 

This is the real challenge for me when using Max, how to make a patch 

that is specialized enough to make the kind of music I want, and general 

enough to support several different works.

Just some thoughts. But I find that the most helpful "max tip" is to 

have a clear idea of what problem you want to solve before you go out 

and try to solve it. You will get more ideas along the way that will 

eventually lead you to a final product that is more original than what 

Well, there might be your first problem.  Not in sense that the kind of 
music you want to make is bad, but in the sense that you really have to 
define your goals before you start.  "Experimental electronic" covers a 
lot of ground.  Do you want to sound like Aphex Twin, David Tutor, Les 
Stuck, Matmos, Gregory Taylor, Barry Threw, Christopher Willits, or 
Radiohead?  Of course you want to sound like yourself, but you have to 
have a voice in mind.  Do you want to drop phat beats, or create subtle 
textures?

Once you answer that question, then perhaps a good exercise would be to 
create one piece with a Max patch.  Not a magnum opus, but just 
something you kind of like, and more importantly, that feels like its a 
sound you can resonate with.  After that, you think about what aspects 
of that piece you liked, and try and generalize those features that
patch to play more similar pieces.

Start small and simple, and add features as you go.  Don't start out 
trying to make a 10.16 surround patch that uses a comprehensive array of 
effects and synthesis techniques and also makes julienne fries.  If you 
start out small, it will be conceptually easier to work your way through 
a patch.

This is the real challenge for me when using Max, how to make a patch 
that is specialized enough to make the kind of music I want, and general 
enough to support several different works.

Just some thoughts.  But I find that the most helpful "max tip" is to 
have a clear idea of what problem you want to solve before you go out 
and try to solve it.  You will get more ideas along the way that will 
eventually lead you to a final product that is more original than what 
you started out trying to do.

Quote: jmdarremont wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 10:53

----------------------------------------------------

> IMHO pieces of software must be used for what they are good for.

> Considering what you wrote I think you need to try other softwares.

Jean-Michel, I humbly disagree. There was no indication that Max "isn't right" for the OP, from what I read he is simply asking for a way to "work smarter" with it.

As with all music production my recommendation is: Compartmentalization (like Computo said) and - Deadlines! Start by setting up a really simple track and set out to build *one* killer sound for it. It needn't be genius, the purpose is to start building, say, an soundFX generator, that can be saved and used in a larger compositional patch. Build up your library like this, and soon you'll have a decent lib to use.

In the very short month I've used max(and I just got started on the msp stuff) I didn't start work on anything unless I had a design in mind beforehand. Just some rough idea of what I wanted to acheive was all it took, and I now have quite a decent midi manipulation rig ready to go. Similarly I was discussing certain looping elements with a friend, and I was just about ready to try out the MSP side of things, so the first synth was a sine-wave FMed with its own looping delay: A very simple patch, must be around 20 objects or less, but the efficiency is there, since I had the idea to begin with.

Uhm. That came out a bit long-winded, but I hope I was clear regardless.

Quote: jmdarremont wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 10:53
----------------------------------------------------
> IMHO pieces of software must be used for what they are good for.
> Considering what you wrote I think you need to try other softwares.
> Or even something else than software.
Jean-Michel, I humbly disagree. There was no indication that Max "isn't right" for the OP, from what I read he is simply asking for a way to "work smarter" with it.

As with all music production my recommendation is: Compartmentalization (like Computo said) and - Deadlines! Start by  setting up a really simple track and set out to build *one* killer sound for it. It needn't be genius, the purpose is to start building, say, an soundFX generator, that can be saved and used in a larger compositional patch. Build up your library like this, and soon you'll have a decent lib to use. 

As for me, sometimes i much prefer to use Lisp for what i have to do with

complitly different... An other way of thinking computer programming.

Csound is kind of hard for me to use... it's a lot of code to write for

something i can do with max in few minutes but 

once again, it a question of what is the most appropriated for your needs.

Lisp is really great for recurssive programming.

With onlu few lines of code, you can do very interesting things... also,

Max is great, i really love that environnement :-)

Not too hard but not simple also... which language is ? even Python takes

As for me, sometimes i much prefer to use Lisp for what i have to do with
CLCE... Lisp is very powerful and also 
complitly different... An other way of thinking computer programming.

Csound is kind of hard for me to use... it's a lot of code to write for
something i can do with max in few minutes but 
once again, it a question of what is the most appropriated for your needs.

Lisp is really great for recurssive programming.
With onlu few lines of code, you can do very interesting things... also,
it's pretty intuitive, i like that !

Max is great, i really love that environnement :-)
Not too hard but not simple also... which language is ? even Python takes
time :-)

When I started using Max I quickly realized that it could be a very 

productive and creative tool to me, much more so than writing sheet 

music or using programs such as Finale and Vision (nowadays that would 

be Cubase). But I also realized that I would have to learn the program 

really well in order to use it. If not, my creative flow would always 

get blocked by technical difficulties, and by the time I had figured out 

what objects to use and how to do it, the idea would be gone.

I started out using Max before MSP or Nato/Jitter was around, so it was 

only 50 tutorials to crack, not 150 as it is these days. I started 

reading them thoroughly, stopping after each chapter to check out the 

references and help files on the various objects introduced. By the time 

I had gotten to tutorial 17 I had the idea for my first installation 

piece based on Max. I still think of that as the first thing I did that 

was artistically heading in the direction I wanted to go.

Later, when I got hold of MSP I felt that the MSP tutorials were good 

for learning MSP itself, but I needed more knowledge on audio processing 

in able to make any sense of it. So I bought "Computer music: synthesis, 

composition and performance" by Dodge and Jerse. I really recommend 

that book. I found it to have a good and structured progression, and 

it is providing enough details that I was able to turn the techniques 

discussed into Max patches. In comparison I have sometimes felt that 

The Computer Music Tutorial by Curtis Roads lack the last few details 

required in order to implement the techniques discussed myself. Still 

that book is a must further down the road.

Musicians have to practice their instruments, rehearsing scales, etc in 

order to develop technical skills that are a prerequisite for artistic 

expression. A composition student have to study counterpoint, 

harmonization, orchestration, etc. In the same way artists depending on 

digital tools have to continuously explore and learn about their medium, 

in particular so because the "instrument" we are playing is changing on 

a more or less daily basis. Reading mailing lists, books, searching 

information on the net, trying out stuff by patching, checking out 3rd 

party objects, etc. are my etudes, and I have to do them on a daily basis.

If you are mainly into music, I would recommend spending as much time as 

possible with the Max tutorials before moving on to MSP. MIDI might be 

less exciting, but the important lessons about how to program, and how 

to use Max in a good way is first and foremost revealed in the max 

tutorials. The better you know them, the better you will be able to make 

I have seen other approaching Max in a much less structured way than 

myself and come up with really interesting results, so I am not claiming 

that this is the only valid approach. But this is what have worked for 

me so far. But I suppose I am a control freak...

When I started using Max I quickly realized that it could be a very 
productive and creative tool to me, much more so than writing sheet 
music or using programs such as Finale and Vision (nowadays that would 
be Cubase). But I also realized that I would have to learn the program 
really well in order to use it. If not, my creative flow would always 
get blocked by technical difficulties, and by the time I had figured out 
what objects to use and how to do it, the idea would be gone.

I started out using Max before MSP or Nato/Jitter was around, so it was 
only 50 tutorials to crack, not 150 as it is these days. I started 
reading them thoroughly, stopping after each chapter to check out the 
references and help files on the various objects introduced. By the time 
I had gotten to tutorial 17 I had the idea for my first installation 
piece based on Max. I still think of that as the first thing I did that 
was artistically heading in the direction I wanted to go.

Later, when I got hold of MSP I felt that the MSP tutorials were good 
for learning MSP itself, but I needed more knowledge on audio processing 
in able to make any sense of it. So I bought "Computer music: synthesis, 
composition and performance" by Dodge and Jerse. I really recommend 
that  book.  I found it to have a good and structured progression, and 
it is providing enough details that I was able to turn the techniques 
discussed into Max patches.  In comparison I have sometimes felt that 
The Computer Music Tutorial by Curtis Roads lack the last few details 
required in order to implement the techniques discussed myself. Still 
that book is a must further down the road.

Musicians have to practice their instruments, rehearsing scales, etc in 
order to develop technical skills that are a prerequisite for artistic 
expression. A composition student have to study counterpoint, 
harmonization, orchestration, etc. In the same way artists depending on 
digital tools have to continuously explore and learn about their medium, 
in particular so because the "instrument" we are playing is changing on 
a more or less daily basis. Reading mailing lists, books, searching 
information on the net, trying out stuff by patching, checking out 3rd 
party objects, etc. are my etudes, and I have to do them on a daily basis.

If you are mainly into music, I would recommend spending as much time as 
possible with the Max tutorials before moving on to MSP. MIDI might be 
less exciting, but the important lessons about how to program, and how 
to use Max in a good way is first and foremost revealed in the max 
tutorials. The better you know them, the better you will be able to make 
use of Jitter and MSP later on.

I have seen other approaching Max in a much less structured way than 
myself and come up with really interesting results, so I am not claiming 
that this is the only valid approach. But this is what have worked for 
me so far. But I suppose I am a control freak...

The first thing is thinking about your goals.

I never get lost in max becouse I allways know what I want and do a looot of trial and error, wich most of the times drives me much further where I did originally want to go, and this is so nice.

As a sound engineer I can say that the max and MSP manuals are not enough to fully master the software.

Often you'll need a solid sound synthesis and music theory on your side to have good results.

Off course a complex patch could need months to be fully developed (see my gleetchlab software for example), you need patience and knowledge, then inspiration can take control.. :)

well.. barry is right.
The first thing is thinking about your goals.
I never get lost in max becouse I allways know what I want and do a looot of trial and error, wich most of the times drives me much further where I did originally want to go, and this is so nice.
As a sound engineer I can say that the max and MSP manuals are not enough to fully master the software. 

Often you'll need a solid sound synthesis and music theory on your side to have good results.
Off course a complex patch could need months to be fully developed (see my gleetchlab software for example), you need patience and knowledge, then inspiration can take control.. :)

The original question was not so much about learning Max as learning to be efficient and productive when sitting down at the machine with an idea. My number one productivity tip for that is this: 

There is some obvious self-promotion here, but the part of the reason this exists is so that you can sit down and cobble some things together and get them working before you lose that creative momentum...

The original question was not so much about learning Max as learning to be efficient and productive when sitting down at the machine with an idea.  My number one productivity tip for that is this: http://jamoma.org/

While I agree with you Timoty, I firmly think that knowledge is the key to expression in this environment.

Without knowing in depth most of the objects, it is quite difficult to go creative..

While I agree with you Timoty, I firmly think that knowledge is the key to expression in this environment.
Without knowing in depth most of the objects, it is quite difficult to go creative..


The danger (?) is, of course that Max itself becomes

the fun part, and you spend more & more time on it, at

To make music, you need serious time & space; to

doodle with Max, you don't (once you've got past the

I find that these days making music is usually

something I think I'll get round to tomorrow, or 'when

I have the time' - which, with the day job & the

familly & walking the dog, ends up being just about

But I can always time find for a little Maxing,

iteratively nibbling at patches in between jobs at

work and in betweeen familly stuff at home.

What then happens, is that at some point in time, I'm

playing with a patch that has been around for many

months, if not years, and something starts to sound

good, so I hit the record button (thank Cycling for

the QuickRecord patch!), noodle around for a few mins,

I have shedloads of such stuff on my hard-drive, that

Working with Max is not easy